Kid_Eternity
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Epico said:
I blame the heat...
The wrongly portrayed female 'equal pay' issue getting dafter and dafter
- Thread starter Mr. Journo
- Start date
I blame the heat...
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
It's not to do with the gender of the performer, but with the length of the performance and the money paid. A boxing match between two professional boxers is considered a spectacle as well as a sport and they will receive the pre-arranged alocated prize money regardless of how many rounds they manage. People are playing to watch a fight and to see a winner come out of it.i_hate_beckham said:
Wimbledon shouldn't be different. People are there to watch tennis stars play a tournament. The number of sets played should be irrelevant- they're going to watch a match. If those in favour of lower pay for women say the number of sets played should determine how much money is paid to the player then they surely should support reductions in prize money for those men who win their games in 3 sets.
kained&able
Here for the football.
The men's tour generates twice as much income as the women's; demand dictates that Wimbledon corporate packages for the men's quarter- and semi-finals cost twice as much as the women's equivalent. At the Australian Open they've abandoned their traditional all-women days because television viewing figures were regularly eclipsed by Skippy The Bush Kangaroo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2006/06/29/stmj29.xml
piece of shit article but i presume the figures are right.
dave
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2006/06/29/stmj29.xml
piece of shit article but i presume the figures are right.
dave
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
Look tennis was just about ball and raquet, now with technology and advancement its about athleticism and fitness...
Martina Narvratilova and Steffi Graff were the first women to bring this game alive and set a bench mark of fitness levels that has now spawned a new generation of female players that keep the ladies game exciting and interesting to watch.
Having said that the likes of williams, kournikova and sharapova struggle with the longevity issue as they get dazzled by the endorsments and high profile media attention and they seem to drop off after a few years at the top.
I personally find the mens game more exciting to watch these days, actually since steffi dissapeared im not that interested, thats not to say i dont believe in equality.
Wouldnt it be fun to have grandslams open and mixed, that sure would be intersting to watch......it aint gonna happen though
Martina Narvratilova and Steffi Graff were the first women to bring this game alive and set a bench mark of fitness levels that has now spawned a new generation of female players that keep the ladies game exciting and interesting to watch.
Having said that the likes of williams, kournikova and sharapova struggle with the longevity issue as they get dazzled by the endorsments and high profile media attention and they seem to drop off after a few years at the top.
I personally find the mens game more exciting to watch these days, actually since steffi dissapeared im not that interested, thats not to say i dont believe in equality.
Wouldnt it be fun to have grandslams open and mixed, that sure would be intersting to watch......it aint gonna happen though
kained&able
Here for the football.
Incidentlly i perfer the womens game to the mens as its more about working the angles and there is a lot more finesse(willaims/davernprt excluded) then the mens game wehre its all about the serve(hewitt and a few others still doing good)
but if the woment aren't playing as long and more importently aren't generating the the same revenue as the blokes then they should get piad less and just be thankful that they get the better looking trophy at the end of wimbeldon.
dave
but if the woment aren't playing as long and more importently aren't generating the the same revenue as the blokes then they should get piad less and just be thankful that they get the better looking trophy at the end of wimbeldon.
dave
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
Neva said:
Yes im known to be a bit vague at times
Well no, if the men play more sets......but i cant see the problem in letting them have a go, fitness levels across the ladies game will have to increase somewhat to cope as not to create a gulf between top and bottom (look at Federer), but im sure sooner rather than later you will find out how valid the arguement is.....
So it's all about speed then is it? Nothing to do with actual skill? Right well now I feel educatedNeva said:
The gender divide has already been covered I believe. I'm not saying that men aren't physically stronger most of the time. But you don't have to be the strongest or the fastest in order to be skilful, and it definitely should NOT be a factor in the unequal pay issue. Your argument doesn't hold any water I'm afraid
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
kained&able said:
I think the Big serve/ ace era started by samprass et al, has lessened in the mens game and we are now seeing a mulitude of varied games that both enhance and make mens tennis more enjoyable to watch...
I found samprass dull to watch....
Federer is unstoppable at present, cant see anyone challenging him unless they upped the number of sets in the mens game
kained&able
Here for the football.
err yes hence why the big servers tend to beat all but the best skillfull men.
And consideroing that the best woment can't serve anywhere near the same speed as the averga eblokes(willams beoing the exception) they would get there arse kicked. Its a physical sport that requires enormous power and many of the more skillfull players have been run out the game basiclly, bith mens and to a certain extent women.
You(sojourner) don't actully sound like you have a clue about tennis and are just getting uppity from the feminoist side of thigs. Which is fair enough but please don't pretend like you know about the sport you clearly don't.
the mens game is getting a bit beter your right haylz hewitt, federer are starting to sort that out, but i thinks its more of a csse of samprass, kalferikov, rusedski etc getting older or retiring rather then a big change. I'm hoping for more skillful players to come trough especilly the americans(like roddick) who like they have a bit of both(the advantage of having samprass and agassi at the same time to idolize i guess) but still see the mens game relying on the bigserves a bit too much.
dave
And consideroing that the best woment can't serve anywhere near the same speed as the averga eblokes(willams beoing the exception) they would get there arse kicked. Its a physical sport that requires enormous power and many of the more skillfull players have been run out the game basiclly, bith mens and to a certain extent women.
You(sojourner) don't actully sound like you have a clue about tennis and are just getting uppity from the feminoist side of thigs. Which is fair enough but please don't pretend like you know about the sport you clearly don't.
the mens game is getting a bit beter your right haylz hewitt, federer are starting to sort that out, but i thinks its more of a csse of samprass, kalferikov, rusedski etc getting older or retiring rather then a big change. I'm hoping for more skillful players to come trough especilly the americans(like roddick) who like they have a bit of both(the advantage of having samprass and agassi at the same time to idolize i guess) but still see the mens game relying on the bigserves a bit too much.
dave
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
sojourner said:So it's all about speed then is it? Nothing to do with actual skill? Right well now I feel educated
The gender divide has already been covered I believe. I'm not saying that men aren't physically stronger most of the time. But you don't have to be the strongest or the fastest in order to be skilful, and it definitely should NOT be a factor in the unequal pay issue. Your argument doesn't hold any water I'm afraid
I think this is more to do with fitness levels and being able to sustain your formover a longer period of time....
I think there are a handful of women capable of making the jump, but i fear a gulf in the womens game may arise, which would make it less intersting to watch imo...
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
kained&able said:
you talking to me....
exosculate
a stagger with a beat
I vote the winnings should be equal. But its a bit irrelevant compared to the real equal pay divide affecting ordinary women rather than rich women.
sojourner said:So it's all about speed then is it? Nothing to do with actual skill? Right well now I feel educated
The gender divide has already been covered I believe. I'm not saying that men aren't physically stronger most of the time. But you don't have to be the strongest or the fastest in order to be skilful, and it definitely should NOT be a factor in the unequal pay issue. Your argument doesn't hold any water I'm afraid
good grief your a fucking moron. follow this through please.
1. Skill is important but, on average, men and women pros will tend to be equal skill wise. For every Federer there's a Henin-Hardenne.
2. As it will be equal in skill and stuff like mental toughness etc then the only thing setting them apart will be the physical aspect which the men, on the whole, will be far superior at.
3. QED men will beat women far, far more than women beat men and the most skillful male players will virtually never lose against the top females. I can't believe your arguing against this.
On the other issue. what???
How good a person is at a physical activity should not be a factor in how much pay they recieve at said physical activity
Your going to have to explain that to me.exosculate
a stagger with a beat
Neva said:good grief your a fucking moron. follow this through please.
1. Skill is important but, on average, men and women pros will tend to be equal skill wise. For every Federer there's a Henin-Hardenne.
2. As it will be equal in skill and stuff like mental toughness etc then the only thing setting them apart will be the physical aspect which the men, on the whole, will be far superior at.
3. QED men will beat women far, far more than women beat men and the most skillful male players will virtually never lose against the top females. I can't believe your arguing against this.
On the other issue. what???
How good a person is at a physical activity should not be a factor in how much pay they recieve at said physical activity
Why are women no good at snooker though?
kained&able
Here for the football.
haylz said:
NOOOOO you know what your on about! i edited for clairity. But chatting to you deriding sojourner is basicly it.
dave
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
exosculate said:
Pool is a different matter after a few stellas
I stayed on the table all night once
kained&able
Here for the football.
exosculate said:
beacuse all the snooker table are in working mens clubs and pubs which women rarely frequent certainly at a young age when they need to develop thier skills.
dave
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
kained&able said:
Cool, i got all confused then......
Sweaty Betty
Hemo rising!
Neva said:dunno. guess they just don't play it very much. I know plenty of girls who fucking rock at pool though.
[edit] haylz beat me to it
I think its more to do with the men getting distracted by a women leaning over the table
Fuck that, mine was more about pure skill
Agent Sparrow
AGENT TRAITOR; fools 8 year olds
Hang on, I've heard a fair few people say they actually prefer watching women's tennis because it isn't just ace after ace, as a result is more tactical and has more rallies, and therefore is found a more interesting game by many.kained&able said:
Men are generally stronger than women, yes. But that doesn't mean men's tennis is "better" than women's tennis when both play their own gender. The assumption it is is rather sexist and patriarchal in itself.
Similar threads
